The child abuse royal commission has heard critical details about the Catholic Church's negotiations and litigation with abuse victim John Ellis. The inquiry has been examining how and why the church's lawyers cast doubt on Mr Ellis's story of abuse when the matter ended up in court, despite the church accepting his story years earlier. Senior Catholic Church official, Michael Salmon, conceded the approach taken by the church's lawyers did not speak well of the church.

MARK COLVIN: The child abuse royal commission has heard unflattering details about the Catholic Church's hardline negotiations and litigation with abuse victim John Ellis.

Senior Catholic Church official, Michael Salmon, has admitted that some elements of the Church's Towards Healing process could be interpreted as strongarm tactics.

The inquiry has also been exploring how and why the church's lawyers cast doubt on Mr Ellis' story of abuse when the matter ended up in court, despite the Church accepting his story years earlier.

Emily Bourke reports.

EMILY BOURKE: Since 2003, Michael Salmon has been the director of the Catholic Church's Professional Standards Office in New South Wales and the ACT.

And the royal commission has been examining his role and his response to the $100,000 compensation claim brought by abuse victim John Ellis a decade ago.

During the Towards Healing process, the church offered John Ellis a financial gesture of $25,000.

MICHAEL SALMON: I believe the figure was underdone.

EMILY BOURKE: Michael Salmon told the inquiry he believed the Church was concerned about its assets and what the claim might end up costing. But the $25,000 offer, which was ultimately rejected by Mr Ellis, came with a catch: a deed of release.

Mr Salmon was pressed by Mr Ellis' lawyer Maria Gerace on the effect of that contract.

MARIA GERACE: Looking at that process from an outsider's point of view, where a victim is being confronted with a situation, they're being offered an amount of money that is not compensation, but is being asked to sign away their compensation rights, it would appear to be a very strong tactic by the Church?

MICHAEL SALMON: I can understand how a victim might feel that way.

MARIA GERACE: And that it can appear to be a strongarming tactic to compel someone to give away other rights on the one hand and offer them a small amount which doesn't reflect those rights on the other.

MICHAEL SALMON: It could appear that way.

EMILY BOURKE: When the matter came before the courts, the church's lawyers cast doubt on Mr Ellis' abuse, even though the church leadership had accepted Mr Ellis' story.

The vigorous litigation and the facts underpinning it prompted questions from Justice Peter McClellan.

PETER MCCLELLAN: You accepted the truth, you understood all of the Church authorities accepted the truth, but you sat there while the Church put in issue the truth of what Ellis was saying in the litigation, is that right?

MICHAEL SALMON: I did not have dialogue with the Church in relation to the litigation process about that issue. I've given evidence to that effect.

PETER MCCLELLAN: No, but you knew what the Church was doing didn't you?

MICHAEL SALMON: I knew that they were making, that that was their position. I didn't know the reasons for it.

PETER MCCLELLAN: And you didn't go and say to the Church authorities, what you're doing is inconsistent with what we all understand to be the truth?

MICHAEL SALMON: No I didn't have that discussion with the Church authority.

EMILY BOURKE: And Mr Salmon was also asked to provide a personal view on whether Towards Healing provides enough support.

MICHAEL SALMON: I think that the Church should have a willingness to remain connected to victims of abuse and to consider their needs on an ongoing basis.

PETER MCCLELLAN: That might for some people require a lifelong response, mightn't it?

MICHAEL SALMON: It might for some people yes.

PETER MCCLELLAN: The Towards Healing process of course presently falls far short of that doesn't it?

MICHAEL SALMON: It does, but less so for the archdiocese of Sydney, which does have, you know, or has under Monsignor Usher's term as chancellor, has had an openness to consider people's needs going forward.

PETER MCCLELLAN: Your position would, in your experience, require the Church to make a far more significant monetary contribution to many people than it has in the past, wouldn't it?